Young parents' views and experiences of interactions with health professionals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although teenage pregnancy levels are declining, the North East of England still has the highest rate of young parenthood (age <18 years) in the UK. Young parents and their children often face many health and social problems, requiring interactions with a wide range of health professionals, such as midwives, doctors and health visitors. AIM: This qualitative interview study aimed to explore young parents' views and experiences of interactions with health professionals. METHODS: Young mothers and fathers (n=10) were recruited from youth groups and Sure Start parenting classes in Newcastle upon Tyne during the period April-June 2013. They took part in one-to-one or small group semi-structured interviews regarding their experiences of interacting with health professionals about their own health and that of their child. The interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Emergent themes included: beliefs about children's health; proving oneself as a parent; and positives of parenting. All the participants distinguished between being a 'first-time parent, not just a young parent' and all, to varying degrees, challenged the authority and judgement of medical and nursing practitioners with regard to their children's health. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study highlight the need for health professionals to be particularly aware of the sensitivities arising from the power imbalances perceived by young parents of ill children. This can be achieved by following communication skills frameworks (e.g. the Calgary-Cambridge framework) that emphasise the importance of techniques such as active listening and building rapport.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".